John
Richard Daly appeals the Social Security Administration's
("SSA") denial of his application for disability
and supplemental security benefits. An Administrative Law
Judge ("ALJ") found that Daly suffered from the
following severe impairments: asymptomatic human
immunodeficiency virus (HIV), chronic obstructive pulmonary
disease (COPD), coronary artery disease, and right coronary
artery status post stent insertion. The ALJ also found that
Daly suffered from several non-severe impairments: neck pain,
kidney disease, hyperlipidemia and depression. The ALJ
ultimately found that Daly was not disabled within the
meaning of the Social Security Act because he has sufficient
residual functional capacity ("RFC") to perform,
with some restrictions, his past relevant work as a
convenience store clerk, medical records clerk, ticket agent
or telephone representative.[1]See 42 U.S.C. §
423(d)(2)(A). The SSA Appeals Council subsequently denied
Daly's request for review of the ALJ's decision,
rendering the ALJ's decision final.[2] Daly timely
appealed to this court, pursuant to 42 U.S.C. §
405(g). In due course, Daly moved to reverse the
SSA's decision or, alternatively to remand it for further
consideration.[3] The Acting Commissioner moved to affirm
the denial of benefits.[4]

Daly
argues that the ALJ's RFC finding was based on an
improper weighing of medical evidence. After consideration of
the parties' arguments and the administrative record, the
court finds the record evidence sufficient to support the
ALJ's decision. Therefore, the Acting Commissioner's
motion is granted and Daly's is denied.

I.
Standard of Review

The
court's review of the SSA's final decision "is
limited to determining whether the ALJ used the proper legal
standards and found facts upon the proper quantum of
evidence." Ward v. Comm'r of Soc. Sec, 211
F.3d 652, 655 (1st Cir. 2000). The ALJ's decision will be
upheld if it is supported by substantial evidence, that is,
"such evidence as a reasonable mind might accept as
adequate to support a conclusion." Richardson v.
Perales,402 U.S. 389, 401 (1971) (quotations omitted).
This is less evidence than a preponderance but "more
than a mere scintilla." Id.; Consolo v.
Fed. Mar. Comm'n,383 U.S. 607, 620 (1966). The
possibility of drawing two inconsistent conclusions from the
evidence does not preclude a finding of substantial evidence.
Consolo, 383 U.S. at 620. Accordingly, the ALJ's
resolution of evidentiary conflicts must be upheld if
supported by substantial evidence, even if contrary results
are supportable. Rodriguez Pagan v. Sec'y of Health
& Human Servs.,819 F.2d 1, 2 (1st Cir. 1987). The
court next turns to the ALJ's decision.

In
analyzing Daly's benefit application, the ALJ invoked the
required process. See 20 C.F.R. § 416.920.
First, she concluded that Daly had not engaged in substantial
work activity after the alleged onset of his disability on
January 21, 2013.[6]

Next,
the ALJ determined that Daly suffered from several severe
impairments: asymptomatic human immunodeficiency virus (HIV),
chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), coronary artery
disease, and right coronary artery status post stent
insertion.[7]See 20 C.F.R. § 416.1520(c).
At the third step, the ALJ concluded that Daly's
impairments - either individually or collectively -- did not
meet or "medically equal" one of the listed
impairments in the Social Security regulations.[8]See 20
C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(d), 404.1525, 404.1526. The ALJ
next found that Daly had the RFC to perform light work, with
several limitations: he can occasionally climb ramps and
stairs, but never climb ladders, ropes and scaffolds; he can
frequently stoop and crouch, and can occasionally crawl; he
should avoid exposure to extreme heat, moderate humidity and
moderate respiratory irritants; he needs to be within 50
yards of a bathroom; he needs the option to change between
sitting and standing for 1-2 minutes every 30 minutes in the
immediate vicinity of his workstation.[9] See 20 C.F.R.
§§ 404.1567(b) and 416.967(b).

Finally,
at step four, the ALJ found that Daly could perform his past
relevant work as a convenience store clerk, medical record
clerk, ticket agent, or telephone representative, none of
which would be precluded by the limitations in his RFC. The
ALJ accordingly found that Daly was not disabled, with the
meaning of the Social Security Act. See 42 U.S.C. §
423(d).

III.
Analysis

Daly
argues that, in formulating the RFC, the ALJ did not
adequately consider the physical limitations created by COPD,
his heart impairment, the need to frequently use the bathroom
due to side effects from his HIV medication, as well as
limitations created by depression and obsessive compulsive
disorder. The court finds, however, that the record
adequately supports the ALJ's consideration of these
issues.

A.
COPD

The ALJ
recognized that the record contained evidence of Daly's
COPD, observing that a May 2012 study showed a moderately
severe defect.[10] However, the ALJ also noted that
Daly's use of a bronchodilator improved his
condition.[11] Moreover, in February 2014, Dr. Buono,
one of Daly's treating physicians, reported that
Daly's COPD had been well-managed with occasional
albuterol use.[12] His COPD was also well-controlled and
stable several months later, at which time Dr. Buono noted
that Daly had been using an inhaler when
needed.[13] Based on these observations, the ALJ
included in Daly's RFC a restriction to only moderate
exposure to humidity and respiratory irritants and complete
avoidance of extreme heat.[14] In this appeal, Daly points to
his testimony that the COPD left him exhausted and reiterates
the fact that a pulmonary function test revealed the
condition, [15] a fact which, as previously noted, the
ALJ considered. As for Daly's testimony, the ALJ found
that his statements concerning his symptoms were "not
entirely credible" given the contrast between his
testimony and the medical record.[16] Daly has not challenged
the ALJ's credibility determination. See Irlanda
Ortiz v. Sec'y of Health & Human Servs., 955
F.2d 755, 769 (1st Cir. 1991) ("It is the responsibility
of the Secretary to determine issues of credibility . . .
.") .

B.
Cardiac disease The ALJ noted that in 2008 Daly had
been diagnosed with coronary artery disease, had a stent
placed in his right coronary artery, and had undergone repeat
angioplasties.[17] The ALJ cited subsequent record evidence
showing "significant[] recover[y], " with little
additional symptomology.[18] While Daly reported occasional
shortness of breath and chest pain with activity to his
cardiologist in January 2013, he related to Dr. Buono a year
later that a recent visit to his cardiologist showed no acute
concerns over his heart condition.[19] The ALJ further noted
that positive reports continued into 2014: stress test
reports were negative; Daly reported that he was able to go
hiking; and finally, an August 2014 cardiac examination
revealed a regular heart rate and rhythm.[20] On appeal,
Daly notes only that his cardiac condition required
hospitalization in 2011.[21]

The
court finds no error in the ALJ's weighing of the record
evidence regarding Daly's cardiac issues.

C.
HIV and medication side-effects

Daly
testified that he was diagnosed with HIV more than 25 years
ago and that side effects from medication have resulted in
frequent episodes of diarrhea which would cause him to use
the bathroom four to six times during a normal work shift and
prevent him from working.[22] The ALJ accounted for this
testimony by including the limitation in Daly's RFC
assessment that he be within 50 yards of a
bathroom.[23] As the ALJ noted, however, in an August
2014 visit to his infectious disease specialist (roughly two
months prior to his hearing testimony), Daly provided a
negative history for diarrhea and denied any adverse
reactions to his HIV medication.[24] In addition, the ALJ gave
"great consideration" to the treatment notes of Dr.
Buono (Daly's primary care physician), to whom Daly
reported "no changes in bowel habits" in February
and March of 2014.[25] It was well within the ALJ's purview
to resolve the conflict between Daly's testimony and the
medical record. See Irlanda Ortiz, 955 F.2d at 769
("Indeed, the resolution of conflicts in the evidence is
for the Secretary, not the courts.") (citing
Rodriguez v. Sec'y of Health & Human Servs.,647 F.2d 218, 222 (1st Cir. 1981)) .

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;D.
M ...

Our website includes the first part of the main text of the court's opinion.
To read the entire case, you must purchase the decision for download. With purchase,
you also receive any available docket numbers, case citations or footnotes, dissents
and concurrences that accompany the decision.
Docket numbers and/or citations allow you to research a case further or to use a case in a
legal proceeding. Footnotes (if any) include details of the court's decision. If the document contains a simple affirmation or denial without discussion,
there may not be additional text.

Buy This Entire Record For
$7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.